Corby Chess Club Magazine

Issue 004 (March 2000)

In this issue:

• Moffat, A - Smith, L

Recent games...

• Moffat, A - Sawiak, J

The Dragon That Never Was

Now I see a field scattered with flowers on a spring morning. This may explain my ineptitude at chess. If on he other hand you can see a dragon in the picture then you are undoubtably a naturalised chess player. This simplified position shows the outline to the Dragon variation of the Sicilian defence. It is so called because it it is said that the pawn structure characterised by Black's unmoved e pawn in conjunction with the fianchettoed king's bishop is said to give the structure the appearance of a dragon. By the way if you did see a dragon please let me know, I have some serious questions for you.

Games People Play

It was generally agreed that it would most likely be Lee Smith, whom I'd never played before. As to the opening noone had, or could remember having the white pieces against Lee but I did get some clues regariding his style. I had hoped to be told something along the lines of "Oh yes, Lee always plays 9...g5 in the Najdorf, adopts a reversed Carlsbad pawn structure, has a penchant for the two bishops, is a wizard in tactical assaults on the king, gets lost in the closed game and is suspect in lone king endgames." Still, where would be the fun in that.

Given the information at hand what we can state is that: I will have the white pieces (no double sided coin here - this is prearranged) and the first move will be 1.e4. We can speculate as to the rest. My guess is 1...c5 and an expression of some flexibility, perhaps a Sicilian dragon. The respective merits or otherwise of this type of investigative snooping with the intent of changing one's play is highly questionable, but I do find it fun. I must confess to a certain satisfaction if I guess correctly. It would be quite dubious to change from your regular opening in an attempt to outfox an opponent, although I have done it. Other aspects though may warrant more consideration.

As an example I recall the following: Many years ago whilst analysing the games of a fellow protagonist and active club member (whom, for the sake of anonymity we shall refer to as "McMac") I came to the following conclusion - McMac's style inclined towards the romantic, his preference was for the open game and associated direct assault. (To counter this one could, of course, opt to play the closed game. I chose a different path.) On further investigation a clue came to light, a shining star, the king's bishop. Time and again it could be seen that this piece played a pivotal role in the build up and execution of McMac's game. A key link in the chain.

As an experiment in future given the opportunity the said bishop was to be harrased and if possible exchanged. The result was a revalation. It seemed McMac would rather jump through rings of fire and face the wrath of Khan rather than surrender his beloved bishop. Self-evident truth or coincidence? This irrational affinity (as I saw it then) demanded further exploration and exploitation. In practice this meant that in any given position I could be assured of McMac's likelihood or otherwise to exchange, or whether he would commit pawn weaknesses in defence of said bishop. If I destroyed McMac's bishop he was like a fish out of water. My results began to improve and with each new game I became more and more convinced that I had found a magic key and McMac's game was as good as dead.

Now McMac is no mug. It was only a question of time (and some gross overexploitation) and the golden goose was dead. McMac adapted his play and there was peace and tranquility in the valley. In hindsight ther was probably nothing irrational in McMac's utilisation of the bishop. It was quite simply the best tool for the job in the open positions which he adopted at that time and this was reinforced by the results. McMac was winning with it. It was understandable then that there should be a reluctance to give it up. And so we have come full circle. As in chess, so it is in life, as Lasker would say.

Play the position or play the man? It's a fascinating topic and I have many more examples which I would like to come back to some other time.

On to the game...

Silver King

 
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+

The Moscow variation of the Sicilian defence - a sound attacking line developed in the thirties. An anti-Sicilian system. Made popular and brought to the attention of the global community of chess brethren by me in 80s (I used this opening to good effect in many minor tournaments at that time and attributed this in part to the relative anonymity of the line, thus surprising many opponents with it, or at any rate diverting to a path perhaps less familiar to them.) Alas this entailed its adoption into the repertoire of the World champion Garry Kimovich Kasparyan Kasparov Weinstein and many of the coming young bloods: Shirov, Kramnik, Ivanchuck, Short etc. So that nowadays I can expect every Tom, Dick etc. to be fully conversant with its potential.That is more than I have ever been able to realise.

3...Nd7 4.Nc3 Ngf6 5.d4 a6 6.B×d7+ N×d7 7.Bg5

All in accordance with accepted theory so far although the Bg5 is not too common. White's strategy is classical, albeit simplistic, namely rapid development and as early an attack on the Black king as can be afforded whilst simultaneously crossing Black at any given opportunity. Black is to be prevented from reaching his ideal position.

7...b5!?

Risk taker or confuser? This move simply smacks of confidence.

8.0-0 Bb7 9.Qe2 c×d4?!

Was Black concerned by e4-e5?

I find assessment of such positions difficult and I am not at all confident about marking Black's last move as dubious. On the surface Black appears contemptuous towards the safety of his king and plays with such confidence. In the end I could not decide if the move was book or that Black was worried about a possible White e5. In any event Black is sailing close to the wind. The pawn exchange is not a bad move per se, indeed it forms part of a common theme in many Sicilians whereby the c pawn has cleared the way for the occupation of the key square c4 by the knight (via b6 of course). This manoeuvre together with the utuilisation of the c file by a rook and the fianchetto of the king's bishop and Black will be spitting fire on White's queen side. It gets worse - the c4 square can be regarded as a hole that the Black knight can exploit. Any attempt to drive the knight away with b3 is tantamount to a blunder as White is then lumbered with a backward c pawn and Black's rook on c8 in conjuction with the Dragon bishop become immense.

No. c×d4 is not a bad move but I must question the timing. I may be setting myself up for a fall and I am reluctant to criticise such a talented player most probably more familiar with this opening than myself. Lee has played thus far with the utmost diligence and care. Obviously he had a well planned scheme in mind and yet this move hit me like a slap in the face. Having developed just two pieces Black now undertakes the opening of the centre, presumably to facilitate the earliest attack on his own king, now firmly entrenched there. I should say "thank you" but I do confess to being somewhat bemused. had the move been played by a novice I would have immediately attributed it as a mistake and that would have been the end of it.

Unable to to fathom Black's strategy I began to look elsewhere for an explanation. The six million dollar question is: Does this constitute intelligent play or is Black bending the rules in an attempt to transpose into a prejudicial preconception, namely the Dragon or some other preferred variation? If it is the latter Black makes a rod for his own back. It takes two to tango - you must go with the flow.

Having made the point I cannot confirm this without Lee's input and I may be barking up the wrong lamppost. I suspect that like most things chessical Black's move selection would be a synthesis of ideas and that Black's endeavours are geared towards producing conducive to his knowledge and understanding. Positions with which we are familiar are ideal in this respect and therefore it is natural that we should gravitate towards them.

Making the move now, to my eyes at any rate, is totally out of context with the current position. White can endeavour to open the centre himself but then it would be Black who would gain from any resulting tempi. Therefore I conclude Black's judgement to be clouded (or at least tinged) by an external factor to which I am not privy, or too stupid to see. I fancied my chances. My computer evaluates the position as equal.

10.N×d4 g6 11.Nd5 Nb6 12.c3 N×d5 13.e×d5 B×d5 14.N×b5 Qd7

[14...a×b5 15.Q×b5+; 14...B×g2 15.K×g2 a×b5 16.Q×b5+ Qd7]

15.Rfd1 Be6 (+=) 16.Qe4 Rb8 17.Nd4 R×b2 18.Rab1 Rb5

My trusty old computer, bless its cotton socks, suggests 18...R×b1 as leading to an equal game. I would disagree and apparently so does Black who realises that he should never have opened the b file and immediately tries to close it.

19.N×b5(+-) a×b5 20.Qa8+ Qc8 21.Q×c8+ B×c8 22.R×b5 Bg7

The dragon makes its debut but there's only a pawn on the long diagonal. Not much then for a hungry dragon.

23.Rb8 Kd7 24.Rdb1 e6 25.Bd2 Ba6 26.R×h8 B×h8 27.Rb8 Be5 28.Ra8 Bb7 29.Rf8 Ke7 30.Rb8 Ba6 31.Ra8 Bc4 32.Bg5+ f6 33.Ra7+ Kd8 34.Bd2 h5?

Black's bishop is without luft.

35.Ra4?

A horrible move under any criteria, overlooking f4 which wins the bishop. The scramble to the time control has both players excited.

35...d5

Time control.

36.f3 Kd7 37.Kf2 B×h2 38.g3 h4 39.g×h4 Kd6

Black offers a second bite of the cherry which will not be missed.

40.Kg2 Be5 41.f4 B×f4 42.B×f4+ e5 43.Bg3 Ke6 44.Ra7 Kf5 45.a4 d4 46.c×d4 e×d4 47.Kf3 Bd5+ 48.Ke2 Be4 49.Re7 Bc2 50.a5 Kg4 51.Be1 Ba4 52.Kd3 g5 53.h×g5 f×g5 54.K×d4 Kf3 55.Re3+ Kf4 56.Rg3 Bc6 57.Kc5

1-0

CRASH AND BURN LEE SMITH!
This is one of my key games for the season and as you can imagine, unlike some of the others, I'm very pleased with the result.

Alan Moffat

top

CCC Ladder

Moffat, A - Sawiak, J [B40]
17.11.2000
[Moffat, A]

 
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 d6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Bd3 Nc6 6.0-0 Be7 7.b3 0-0 8.Bb2 a6 9.Rc1 Re8 10.Bb1 Bf8 11.d4 c×d4 12.N×d4 Ne5 13.Kh1 Nfg4 14.g3 Qf6 15.Kg2

Both parties here consider the other's play to be faulty. Black argues that the loosened pawn position around White's king endangers the monarch. White aims to demonstrate that a kingside pawn storm will rout the Black pieces and spearhead a more lasting assault -- with Black in disarray White's king will be safe in the relatively open position. TIme will then be a critical factor. To that end White should have taken the opportunity to play 15.f4!? He rejects this as being too complicated -- too much like hard work, perhaps.

15...Qg6!

I could not decipher to what end this move was played. Was it perhaps to facilitate f5? Black rattles his sabre in the face of the white king but he has no intention of throwing himself upon the sword. Black's attack is insufficiently supported and destined to failure. His pieces are to become targets for the White onslaught.

16.h3 Nh6 17.f4 Nc6

White is happy with his position. He has an advantage in two of the primary elements -- time (better development) and space (control of more terrain, greater mobility) -- which he intends to turn to good account. However, Black will seek to exploit White's loosened king position. After lengthy consideration White decides to press ahead...

18.e5

SImplest is best? White will follow up by removing Black's only active piece -- the knight on c6 -- and shatter the queenside in the process. Then White will capture the d pawn and wedge it there with a pawn advance to c5. He will retain the initiative and have a protected passed pawn (and an extra one to boot). A simple win!

18...f5

Critically I had failed to realise the consequences of the Re8 now being protected. Furthermore I had underestimated the value of Black's alternative here (18...Nf5).

19.N×c6 b×c6 20.e×d6 c5

Not unexpected, but now White's intended theme of easy entry into Black's camp via Qf3 and Qc6 is now seen as a no-no. It is Black who will secure the long diagonal. Oops!

21.Na4 Bb7+ 22.Kh2 B×d6!

Played without hesitation. Like a shower in the desert Black's game explodes into life. If Bb7 was a head butt then this is a kick in the groin!

23.Q×d6

John's speed of sight of the board has often caused me to query his response although I have rarely found it to be wrong. Nevertheless White elects to put it to the test once again. He deludes himself into thinking that Black's play is opportunistic and that he has missed White's next. The alternative 23.Qe2, though adequate, is not what White wants to see. He has lost his objectivity.

23...Rad8 24.Q×c5 Rd2+ 25.Rf2 Ng4+!

What sweet irony is this.

0-1

Alan Moffat

top